These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

180 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19585229)

  • 1. Does post-identification feedback affect evaluations of eyewitness testimony and identification procedures?
    Douglass AB; Neuschatz JS; Imrich J; Wilkinson M
    Law Hum Behav; 2010 Aug; 34(4):282-94. PubMed ID: 19585229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Post-identification feedback to eyewitnesses impairs evaluators' abilities to discriminate between accurate and mistaken testimony.
    Smalarz L; Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2014 Apr; 38(2):194-202. PubMed ID: 24341835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The mitigating effects of suspicion on post-identification feedback and on retrospective eyewitness memory.
    Neuschatz JS; Lawson DS; Fairless AH; Powers RA; Neuschatz JS; Goodsell CA; Toglia MP
    Law Hum Behav; 2007 Jun; 31(3):231-47. PubMed ID: 17253155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Is manipulative intent necessary to mitigate the eyewitness post-identification feedback effect?
    Quinlivan DS; Wells GL; Neuschatz JS
    Law Hum Behav; 2010 Jun; 34(3):186-97. PubMed ID: 19399600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Postidentification feedback affects subsequent eyewitness identification performance.
    Palmer MA; Brewer N; Weber N
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2010 Dec; 16(4):387-98. PubMed ID: 21198255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Can eyewitnesses correct for external influences on their lineup identifications? The actual/counterfactual assessment paradigm.
    Charman SD; Wells GL
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Mar; 14(1):5-20. PubMed ID: 18377163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of post-identification feedback, delay, and suspicion on accurate eyewitnesses.
    Quinlivan DS; Neuschatz JS; Douglass AB; Wells GL; Wetmore SA
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Jun; 36(3):206-14. PubMed ID: 22667810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cueing confidence in eyewitness identifications: influence of biased lineup instructions and pre-identification memory feedback under varying lineup conditions.
    Leippe MR; Eisenstadt D; Rauch SM
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Jun; 33(3):194-212. PubMed ID: 18600436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of postidentification feedback on eyewitness identification and nonidentification confidence.
    Semmler C; Brewer N; Wells GL
    J Appl Psychol; 2004 Apr; 89(2):334-46. PubMed ID: 15065979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Instruction bias and lineup presentation moderate the effects of administrator knowledge on eyewitness identification.
    Greathouse SM; Kovera MB
    Law Hum Behav; 2009 Feb; 33(1):70-82. PubMed ID: 18594956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. On the diagnosticity of multiple-witness identifications.
    Clark SE; Wells GL
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Oct; 32(5):406-22. PubMed ID: 18095147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The dynamic interaction between eyewitnesses and interviewers: the impact of differences in perspective on memory reports and interviewer behavior.
    Douglass AB; Brewer N; Semmler C; Bustamante L; Hiley A
    Law Hum Behav; 2013 Aug; 37(4):290-301. PubMed ID: 23646916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Investigating investigators: examining the impact of eyewitness identification evidence on student-investigators.
    Boyce MA; Lindsay DS; Brimacombe CA
    Law Hum Behav; 2008 Oct; 32(5):439-53. PubMed ID: 18060486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Eyewitness testimony.
    Wells GL; Olson EA
    Annu Rev Psychol; 2003; 54():277-95. PubMed ID: 12209024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Children's metacognitive judgments in an eyewitness identification task.
    Keast A; Brewer N; Wells GL
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2007 Aug; 97(4):286-314. PubMed ID: 17512942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Double-blind photo lineups using actual eyewitnesses: an experimental test of a sequential versus simultaneous lineup procedure.
    Wells GL; Steblay NK; Dysart JE
    Law Hum Behav; 2015 Feb; 39(1):1-14. PubMed ID: 24933175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Biased lineup instructions and face identification from video images.
    Thompson WB; Johnson J
    J Gen Psychol; 2008 Jan; 135(1):23-36. PubMed ID: 18318406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Blind lineup administration as a prophylactic against the postidentification feedback effect.
    Dysart JE; Lawson VZ; Rainey A
    Law Hum Behav; 2012 Aug; 36(4):312-9. PubMed ID: 22849416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The selective cue integration framework: a theory of postidentification witness confidence assessment.
    Charman SD; Carlucci M; Vallano J; Gregory AH
    J Exp Psychol Appl; 2010 Jun; 16(2):204-18. PubMed ID: 20565204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Criminal identification comparison: aural versus visual identifications resulting from a simulated crime.
    Hollien H; Bennett G; Gelfer MP
    J Forensic Sci; 1983 Jan; 28(1):208-21. PubMed ID: 6680738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.